N feeling. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Haven't had it since the storm. Good afternoon. This is a hearing of the CHAM Conservation Commission being held
on July 9th, 2025 in accordance with the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, excuse me, and the town of Chattam Wetlands Protection bylaw and Regulations. My name is Karen Latin and I serve as the chair. Today's hearing is being broadcast live on Expend Channel
1072 and is being recorded for the on demand archives available on the town's website. It is being conducted in person, by phone, and by video conference. The agenda, instructions on how to attend and copies of documents for review are
posted on the town's website. To all participants, when whether attending by phone or online, please remain muted unless you have been recognized by the chair. When recognized, please identify yourself for the record. If you're attending by phone, you can mute and
unmute by using star six. If you are online and you are not a commissioner, please keep your camera turned off unless you've been recognized. Indicate that you wish to speak by using the raise hand feature. So that we have a record of quorum, I will now ask each
commissioner to indicate their presence. Vice Chair Paul Johnson, present. Elise Gordon, present. Janet Williams, present. Eric Hilbert present. Bob Delvecio present. And I'm here. So we've established that we have a quorum. Before we begin the
agenda, Paul, are there any announcements about any requests for continuances today? Good afternoon, Madam Chair and commissioners. Yes, we have uh several. 734 Foxhill Road uh is have been requested to continue July 23rd
uh from the September. Excuse me. July 23rd, 2025. The next one is 98 Oyster Pond and the applicants requested a continuence to September 10th, 784 Orleans Road. The continuence will
be to August 27th. And then finally, 32 Bog Way has been withdrawn by the applicant uh without prejudice. Okay. Thank you. At this point, Paul Whiteitman, CHAM's conservation agent, will now lead us through the agenda.
Thank you, Madam Chair. First on the agenda is uh 734 Foxhill Road, Willis Barton Row, Map 12M, parcel W1, SC10 3731 site redevelopment. It was continued from May 14, 224 to and June 11th, 225.
And there has been a request, as I said, to continue to July 23rd, uh, 2025. Okay. Thank you. I think we just need a motion, please. I move that we continue 734 Foxhill Road to the meeting on July 23rd, 2025.
Second. Okay. Bob, I, Eric, I, Paul, I, Janet, I, Elise, I. And I say I. Thank you. So the next one Paul following applicant has requested a order of conditions 27 Strong Island
Road William C. Benjamin map 12M parcel 16B19 DP num SC 103726 project is replacement of an existing patio and walkway with drylaid ashel blue stone and drylaid brick reconfigure patio steps and landscape improvements
project was continued from March 12th 2025 and March 26 2025 ZBA approved on 626 how are you good you've read the I did. I had a few comments that I sent in to Crystal,
right? That was the last time, correct? Or did you send more comments since the last time we heard the order? I sent a few comments uh about two hours ago. Oh, okay. I only received the revised order this morning around 8:00.
Okay. I did not receive They're not substantial, so we can go through them pretty quickly. If you would, yeah, I don't have them. So if you could go through them, I would appreciate it. So the first thing is really just a question whether the order should
mention the fact that there was a hearing on the draft order on April 9th. Um it only mentions today's hearing. Um that's because I mean we can add it
to the public hearings before that but um and we will. Is anybody in it or should I do this? Okay, I think we'll Yeah, exactly what you're doing. Um, we will add it to when there were public
hearings, but the draft order will state today's date. Okay. I wasn't sure whether uh it should mention the special permit granted by the ZBA. Does that appear in the order or No, that's completely No, they're they're completely separate
from us. Fine. Then a question as to the prohibition on clearing vegetation prior to September 1, whether that would apply to our project or um can we re start removing
some of the vegetation as soon as the order is approved? Thoughts? People normally we say September 1st. Well, the biggest problem we have is it's still technically nesting season. So, right,
we don't usually allow that. All right. Not a big deal. I I'd prefer to leave it as September 1st because that's our normal date. Fine. Then uh
page 11J paragraph number two there's a statement that all replacement vegetation has to be native but that's actually contradicted on the next page when uh it's stated that in the
non-disturbed zone everything has to be native but in the outer aura um only 75% needs to be native. So, if we could just strike that word native there on page
um 11J paragraph two right at the bottom of the page all where it says all area disturbed areas during construction shall be reveated with suitable native right
and you don't want the native right because if you go to the next page in paragraph right three I see it in three we know that in 25% in the outer aura can be non-native I think as long as it
says according to the approved plans were okay because that specifies exactly what's supposed to go where I agree so um we can take that out then yeah we took out the word native yep
anything else and then the last comment was 11 G um paragraph A2 a requirement that uh we engage a
qualified consultant contractor approved by the commission. I thought that the last uh hearing you had agreed that given the limited scope of the project we wouldn't need to do that. I do remember that. Gosh,
I don't, but it was too long ago. Yeah, I do remember talking about it. Um, as you can tell, we did not review this again after having reviewed it. Um, so
I think so you'd like that whole number two taken out, I gather, since it mentions consultant, contractor several times, right, in each sentence. Yes. Um,
so what if we changed consultant contractor? I'm trying to think because I mean we want to make sure that what's done is what was approved. And usually that's why we say the contractor
who who is actually going to do the work doing it. You're you're going to do it all yourself or We'll do some of it ourselves. We'll have some other contractors doing it. Different contractors doing different parts of it. So there's not any one right.
Well, this maybe a project this small the agent can come and you know when you're done and look at it. Thanks for volunteering. Shouldn't take I'm sorry. I shouldn't laugh. It shouldn't take long. It's a pretty
small project. Um, no, we can do that. I How about we change um to by the homeowner? Yeah.
By the owner rather than and then as it supervised monitored by the owner. Yes. Well, and the agent who has who will if you have any questions or issues, he'll come at the when you're done. We're just trying to avoid
something where you're partway through a project. You you've made a decision. It's ends up being something that the commission would not have approved. So, we don't want to have you end up having to take something out, you know, so that if you have questions through the process, you need to be able to stay in
close contact with Paul. Oh, yeah. All right, that'll work. Okay, we have made that modification. Anything else? No. Okay, then anybody else have any comments?
questions. I had a couple in there, but they're just uh mostly technicalities. No. Okay. I'm going to accept all these. Stop tracking. Yep. Done. All right. So, we can go to a motion, please.
I move that we approve the order of conditions for 27 Strong Island Road as modified. Second. Okay. Elise I. Janet. I hear um Paul I Eric I
and Bob I this it's okay when you order to close the hearing thank you very much the hearing nothing can happen thank you madam chair next on the agenda
is a request for determination of applicability the address is 70 Point Road. The applicant is Susan and Greg Shorton. Map 11A1, parcel 7-5, R-2510. The project is repair uh an existing
beach access stairs, landings, and elevated boardwalk in kind. The project did include a proposed fence, but the applicant has made a decision to include that in the notice of intent they're filing for the larger project. Okay.
So, Who's here for this RDA? Okay. Um, hi. Good afternoon. Hi. Can you see me and hear me? Yes. Thank you. All right. Um, with your permission, I'll quickly share my screen so you can see the plan.
Yep. Please. Thank you. I am hoping you'll be able to see this in a second. You can see that. Yes, we can. All right. Excellent. So, the property is located again for the record, Tim Santos from Merill Engineers and Land Surveyors representing the applicant.
The property is located at 70 Point Road. Uh resource areas on or with 100 feet of the property are coastal bank land subject to coastal storm flowage, coastal dune, coastal beach and salt marsh associated with the Oyster Point
River, sorry, Oyster Pond River. Property is developed with an existing single family home, um attached garage, lawn landscaped areas, as well as a few patios. If you've been to the site, there is an existing wooden beach access
set of steps that runs down the bank to a landing and a boardwalk and a set of steps to the existing pier. They are in need of repair for safety measures. I have uh submitted both this plan as well
as a supplemental filing um that kind of shows the steps. Um, there's a few photos here that I'll kind of run through quickly. You can see that that they're old. They're in need of repair. The applicant has recently purchased the
property. So, they are looking to kind of repair this um wooden structure that's been there for many years and upgrade it with some new wood for safety reasons,
tripping hazards. uh you know there's nails that are sticking up as well as splinters everywhere. So um there's no excavation work involved with this. It's just removing the boards and replacing them in kind replaced with a hardwood
something that's suitable and acceptable to the commission. So that is uh my quick presentation for you and I'll stop sharing and then answer any questions you might have. First of all, I just want to make sure
um because this RDA was modified a bit. Um it does not include the fencing that originally you had. I just want to make sure we're all on the same page on that. Yes, we were asked to take the fence off of this and include it within the notice
of intent application. That will be before you. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Um, commissioners, anybody have any questions, comments about this? Go ahead, Janet. Okay. Um, just want to note on the plan,
it does say wood steps to be repaired in kind and I think the accurate language there is replaced it. Are you repairing certain parts and replacing bits or are you replacing all of it? Yeah, we're replacing all of it. All of
the wooden steps need to be replaced. If you look in the supplemental package that I submitted, you you can pretty much see that all the steps in the landing, the wooden and flat surfaces need to be replaced. Oh, I know. I walked them. I I I know exactly what kind of condition they're in. But I'm just just quibbling with the
word repaired in kind on the plan that we're going to approve can can uh give a misconception about what the nature of the uh project is. So they are going to be replaced in exactly the same um dimensions that exist.
Exactly the same dimensions at exactly the same. That is correct. And what about the support uh beams? What about the So the support beams below will not be replaced. It's I'm going to call it the uh what you kind of physically see the
railings, the flat surfaces that you walk on in the steps. Okay. So, it's the railings, the steps, and the and the is the uh boardwalk and the I would call it the landing at the bottom of the steps the same dimensions that currently exist.
Correct. Correct. There is no increase in footprint. Okay. And uh so it's going to be um treated hardwood or what is the what is the material that's it? It'll be a hardwood that's
acceptable to the commission. The contractor has not been selected yet, so they don't know what specific type of wood, but it would be a uh wood that's acceptable to this commission.
This is an RDA, so we um how do we specify just we're just Yeah. Normally in a in a when we have an order of conditions in an NOI we can specify or or say it has to be approved but this is an RDA which doesn't give us that kind of uh opportunity. It can I mean
condition we can condition it. You can condition it. Yeah. So we can put in the language that we usually use for what we I think what we would say since you don't know we have special uh typical language that we use for you
know peers and walkways. we can put that in and ask that um once the decision has been made that it be taken to the agent for approval so that we have a if he thinks we ought to look at it then we'll do that but otherwise it would be just a quick approval process
that's not a problem okay thank you anybody else I just had a quick question so the spacing is going to be the same on the on the boardwalk that is correct every everything would remain the same would just looking to
replace the weathered and deteriorated wood for safety reasons. Well, if we're putting in our verbiage from the orders, normally we do specify the spacing as well. So, you would need
to follow that criteria as well. Um, we will make sure that all of that gets in there into the RDA approval. That that would be for the boarding.
Yeah. And that's okay with you. 3/4 of an inch spacing. Yeah. I mean, it obviously it needs to be rep so it's going to have to be okay. Okay. Good. All right. Um, anybody else? Bob?
Yeah. Uh, hi. So, the, uh, support structure is sound enough to leave in place. The support struct that is correct. At this time, the support structures does not need to be repaired. It's more of just the steps, the railings, and the landing.
Okay. So, there won't be any excavation at all. There's there's no excavation. That was written in the uh RDA. And I have a question on the on the beach itself. You have a couple of um lengths of wooden fence
um on either side. I guess it's uh close to the Well, you can see on the plan. What are those fence? What's the fencing all about? Yeah, I I believe those are old um just kind of wooden
uh storm fences, rack fences. Um if you've been to the site, they've been there for years. So, you're not planning on uh uh we're not fence or anything like that? No, we're not touching any of that.
Okay. Thank you. Anything else? All right, I think we can have a motion and it should also specify that we will be
adding the um normal conditions from our order, our template. I move that we approve the request for determination of applicability with a negative3 determination for 70 Sears Point Road as modified.
Second. Okay. Negative two. Sorry. Yeah. Bob I Eric Hi. Uh Paul. Hi. Janet. Hi. Elise. Hi.
And I say I. Uh, thank you, Madam Chair. Next on the agenda is another uh request for termination applicability. The address is zero Champlain Road. The applicant is uh Cornelia Atkins, map 13A, parcel 16C-3
R-2511. The project is removal of a rusted drainage pipe. No ZBA is required. and Katherine Ricks is here to Good afternoon. Katherine Ricks, coastal resilience director here on behalf of
the applicants. So, uh Paul has a couple um slides he'll show. I don't know if you guys got a chance to go out there. So, it's a rusted drainage pipe that was put in probably years ago on the beach right where there's the grass is coming
up. It's completely eroded off, rusted out, and so it's kind of dangerous to be there um on the beach. So, for public safety reasons, we would like to remove it. We're going to have DPW removing it. And if Paul wants to go to the last
slide, the access is actually a pathway that's already there. They're just going to remove that one section of the fence and have a little machine that goes down there. Remove the pipe that can be seen, kind of cut it off, maybe pull back a little bit of sand, cut it off, and
leave it for now. Uh the picture on the right there is where the drainage is from the road. So, it's coming from there. And we are going to look further into if it's completely blocked or another form of drainage, so it's not just going out onto the beach once we have a chance in the fall. But for now,
we're just asking to remove pretty much what you can see on the beach. Yep. All right. Anybody have any comments, questions? Would Katherine, would there be an additional filing for the the new drainage?
Yes, it'll be a whole We are thinking about a whole new drainage structure for the roadway there that wouldn't even have the pipe going out to the beach. would be a self-contained um drainage structure. Good enough. Thank you. Do you know offh hand whether how its
relationship to that to the um um I was say underground retaining wall that's along there? Does it go through it underneath it? How does it intersect that or we're not sure. So, we're going to look we're going to look more into the researching like exactly where this
goes, but it looks like it's straight up from that drainage structure that's in the roadway, which also is straight across from the little marsh area at 138 Champlne. So, we're going we believe it's all attached, but looking at it there, it looks like it all got filled
in with sand on that side of it. So that's why we want to do more on that drainage structure in the roadway and kind of determine how to take care of all the drainage in the the road there without it going onto the beach. So do you think it was originally intended to drain that that wetland
across the potentially onto the Yeah, and the road. Yeah, both. Okay. And no way of telling us whether anything's coming out of it if it's not operating or we couldn't tell. We tried to look at we couldn't really tell if anything was. I mean, it's definitely the grass is
definitely growing right there. So, potentially, but the the rack line is actually up further on the beach. So, the tide is coming up also in the title cycle. So, we're not really sure if it's the metallics from the pipe that are helping the grass or why that grass
really strongly there to see how this uh will play out over the next period. Thanks, Anybody else? Okay, Paul, is this a negative two? Two resource areas are two Y three or buffer zones.
Y two. Okay. I move that we approve the request for determination of applicability with a negative two determination for zero Champlain Road. Second. Elise. I. Janet. I. Paul. Hi. Eric.
Hi. And Bob. I. And I say I. So, you're all set. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, Paul. Next one. Next, we'll move on to uh submitted notices of intent. Um the first one is
98 Oyster Furlong. Steven A and Haley G. Nadas. I apologize for my misprononunciation if I did mispronounce it. Map 13E, parcel 29-11A, D number SCE 103682. The project is
construction of a beach beach access catwalk. It was continued from May 8th, 2024 and the applicants requested a continuence to September 10th, 2025. It needs ZBA approval. Okay, thank you. So, we just need a motion, please.
I move that we continue 98 pond furong to the meeting on September 10th, 2025. Second. Bob, I Eric, hi. Paul, hi. Janet, I Elise,
I. And I say I Okay, the next one, Paul. Next on the agenda is another notice of intent submission. Um, the address is 784 Orleans Road, Town of Cadam, map
11J, parcel 6-6, D number SCE 103729. The project is enlargement of a boat and trailer parking lot within land subject to coastal storm flowage. It's down at Ryder's Cove. Relocate historic communication tower within the buffer zone to a coastal bank. It was continued
from April 23rd, 2025. The applicant requested a continuence to August 27th and it needs ZBA approval for the tower. Yep. Thank you. Anybody know whether it's been filed with ZBA yet? it
don't believe has. No, that's what I saw. She's Nope. Not it has not. So that's why they are continuing. What are the chances they're going to get a hearing before August? Uh they're they're Greg and Katherine
and um somebody from uh from the DPW are going to have a meeting. Um the there was some spot elevations taken. and it's within conservancy district. So they have to meet with the building inspector to decide whether
there's a prohibition, you know, there's no variance procedure for it. They had to figure out some way to sort of get it around that or permitted. So that's what's holding it up. Yep. So that gives them like six weeks to answer that question and come back to us and
either we continue. Okay, that seems fair. Okay, so we just need a motion. I move that we continue 784 Orleans Road to the meeting on August 27th, 2025. Second. Okay. Bob
I, Eric, I Paul I Janet I and I say I. Okay. The next one, please. Next on the agenda, Madam Chair, is 32 Bogay. This is a notice of intent. The applicant is seen in Alice B uh Bram map
6, parcel 21-7, DP number SC 103728. The project is proposed tiered retaining wall on a slope above the existing dwelling in the lawn. It was continued from April 23rd, 2025 and the applicants requested to withdraw the application
without prejudice and there's no ZBA uh required. Okay, I have a motion, please. I move that we accept I move that we accept the request to withdraw the application for 32 BU without prejudice. Second. Okay. Elise
I. Janet I Paul I Eric I Bob I and I say I okay the next Paul next is another notice of intent madam chair lots 28 and 28A Stson Cove Road Bradley G and Peter Watts are the
trustees map 11B parcel W2 D number SC 10 3733 the project is demolition of existing dwelling construction of a new dwelling swimming pool and patio within the buffer zone to a coastal bank and invasive species control within the coastal bank and land
subject to coastal storm flowage. It was continued from June 11, 20, excuse me, 2025. No ZBA is required. Thank you. Good afternoon. Uh David Clark, Clark Engineering. Uh we have CC from Blue Flex. Uh I apologize for not being at
the onsite. Uh, I was able to go to the first one, but uh, I was out of town for the second one, but I hear it was a very good meeting and uh, and Cece's here to talk about what you all discussed. Okay. Yeah,
thank you all for meeting us on Monday. I thought that was really helpful. Um, it's really valuable to be able to walk through the project all there together. Um, and so based on your feedback from the last hearing, we've made some adjustments to our plan.
And I'm I'm just putting the plan up if you want. Okay. Thank you. Welcome. Um, so we've separated the two lots. The northern lot is lot 28. The southern lot is lot 27.
Um, this this page is showing our tree inventory that Mike and I went and we counted each tree to be removed and we if you want to use the pointer. Thank you for using my laser printer. Oh, nice. Laser pointer. I'm sorry. Thank you.
Moved on up. So, lot 28 on the north and lot 27 on the south. um with corresponding tables that show the tree species and DBH caliber size. And we also hand wrote on
each tree uh its number and caliper size uh just to help help with that. Um and then if you scroll back to the top, thanks. um separated out the plant schedules to show um the plant schedules
for lot 27 and lot 28 as well. Um, and just to go over once more on lot 27, we're proposing to replace 28 trees and 212 shrubs. And we're removing 7,000
square feet of lawn and restoring that as meadow. And we're managing over 21,000 square feet of invasive species and 1,700 square feet of fragmitees. And on lot 28, we're proposing to replace 21
trees, 127 shrubs, remove over 5,000 square feet of lawn, and restore that as meadow, manage over 12,000 square feet of invasive species and 4600 square feet of fragmitees. Um,
so it's very valuable. This invasive species management and lawn restoration is meadow. It's all happening mostly happening within the coastal bank and salt marsh area. Um and removing the invasive species and restoring this area
with proposed and the existing native vegetation will have a positive impact on the health of the ecosystem and will further support a biodiverse native plant and animal community. Um and I did make a slight error when we
went and counted all the trees. um we were able to more specifically identify and the count was slightly off and I failed to change that in our plan note. Um and so I would resubmit a plan uh with the correct number of trees. Um
that was my error and I apologize for that. Um and I think with that I'll take questions uh that you may have. Um thank you. So, because it's still
one one plan and I get that you've separated them out by property and and let us know which is which. Can you just repeat how many we're talking about 28 and 28A right now? So, how many trees are coming out
on lot 28? I think I I think it's 32, but is that where you miscounted or Yeah. 30 31 white popppler and one dead pitch. Okay. Unlock.
So 30 trees 32 trees out. Mhm. And um how many can you give me the square feet of what's being done for 28
because I don't see in the notes the one that I have right that's got the plant schedule separated for each one I the notes don't separate out right which was my and when we're doing the order we need
to have it separated separated out the square footage for each lot. Can I ask a clarifying question here? Yeah, we're going to be writing two orders, one for each one. So, each one Yeah. will need to have all of its all of the numbers. Uh, okay. So, I can further clarify that.
Um, yeah. Sorry. I mean, yeah, it's a lot. Yeah, that's why I'm asking. Uh, a good reason, part of the reason. And so, I think I'll let others ask questions
while I I try and figure out what it is I want to ask. Anybody questions, comments? Go ahead, D. Yeah, I just want to say that the site visit was great. Worked better. It worked in your favor actually to have the site visit. It's not as intimidating
and and just the fragmitees alone to me is is great mitigation for this project. Um, it's going to be quite a job, but it's I think it's great. Thank you. Thank you.
Go ahead, Chad. Just uh Yeah, if you can clarify for each one. So, for 28, we have 32 trees out. You said 7,000 square feet of lawn removal. Is that is that the is that the figure or is it the round? It's defin um
so for lot 28 it's 5,63 square ft of lawn removal. Okay. Mhm. And then the 7,000 was for the other lot. Oh 7,000 is for 27. Yeah. All right. I'm going to make a note of
that. So that's 27 trees and 7,000 lawn. And how and the fragmitees on 28 is 4,674. Wow. Okay. And on 27 that's the 1700.
Yes. Okay. Um and then invasive other inv. So does when you say 21,000 square feet of invasive species removal does that include the fragmitees? No.
Okay. So, in addition, 21,000 square feet and that's on 28 or is that for both? It's um 12,735 square ft on lot 28 and 27
and 21,840 square feet on lot 27. Wow. Okay. So, we're going to need all of these number. You know, your notes. Yes. I think the notes could be better
written. Just clean up the notes and put those specific while we're doing two. You know, this plan will get filed with both properties. Okay. Um so, um also the trees coming out.
I mean well also on the tree inventory and possibly even I think also on the other new plan which was the planting and mitigation you have the the top of the bank coastal bank marked in the green
you need to put that one's the 50 and one's the hundred you don't have those marked sorry yes it's it's fine I'm just saying and we're going to need the analysis of how many
trees should be are required to replace all these trees that are coming out. I know and and we've discussed it that you know it's impossible to put this amount of trees
back in and we're going to have to come to some sort of conclusion on that. But we need to have that noted that you're taking out this many trees on 28 and 28A and this based
on our regulations, this is what would be required to be replaced. Okay. Can I just jump on to that? Yes, please. So, in the notes and what I recall from last time, you know, despite the 2:1 because of the issues that you identified in the density of planting,
um, you were going to do one one. So it the notes do say 51 replacement trees going in. So are those numbers going to be the same for 27 and 28 relating to the numbers coming out or are they going to be in different I can I can separate them. It sounds
like I should kind of further separate as as separate as you can because these are two orders. They're that's where we're coming from. We have to put in all our findings and all this is part of the findings and we have to
justify the findings with our our conclusion. Right. As well as the um so the 341 native shrubs going in again separated separated because they'll need to be accounted for for each order need to
list them. Yeah. Yeah, I just want to point out that she CC did provide two separate tables. One for lot 27 and 27A and one for lot 28 and 20. Yes. Okay. Just to clarify that the number of
trees and shrubs on each lot are there. Okay. Yeah. No, we saw that. Um and I do appreciate that. Um but you know I think number of the plan notes coincide with that separation.
Understood. Okay. The plant schedule. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It keeps jumping every time I jump. And then on page two where we provided the tree table for the specific tree counts. Yes. It's really loud. Um I just want to clarify. You'd like us to add a note based on your
previous mitigation requirements when this was filed. Some of them would have to be replaced at a 3 one because they're in the resource area and some of them at 2:1 because they're in the 50oot buffer. Right. So you'd like a separate table for that? Well, or just stating,
okay, this many trees within the resource area are coming out. These are in the NDZ or these are in the outer aura, you know, and and based off that, I'm taking out three trees in the NDZ, so I need to put six in, you know, that
type of thing. Okay? You know, like you usually do in your plan notes, you'll say we've taken out and at at 2:1 and one, right? This is what will be planted. Okay, understood. Thanks. I know this is very confusing.
No, it's just I partially because two properties with two different orders. Yes. No, that's clear if they were all filed together. This one they're going to be a lot easier and this one for us 32. Okay.
So, they're going to be separate. I just wanted to make sure I was clear and understood so that when we come back we have it. No, no, I appreciate it. We want you to have a clear idea idea. Thank you. All right. Um just a question for us to think about as we as we approach order writing in
this and that is so there's two different things happening here. One are the the the trees that are replacement trees for the ones that are coming out and the other aspect is the mitigation for the coverage. What gets tricky is that um 28
is where the coverage increase happens. 27 there's actually a coverage decrease which normally you would say doesn't need mitigation. So, but it but it has mitigation. So, I'm just going to look at everybody and see we're going to have to I know
say that the mitigation that goes with 27 is not for the coverage but just for the overall and ecological impact of this project or something like that. Um or it's further mitigation for the removal of the trees on 27 something
like that because this coverage is working. I I think one of the challenges and one of the things that makes it even more confusing is when you go out to the site as it exists today, the houses are all spread out over the entire site, all the structures are spread out. So when we
approached it, we were really looking at it holistically as one entire area which you would exactly right. So I think it's just making sure so again when we're thinking about the restoration portion of it, we were also looking at it holistically. So, yes, there will be more trees on one site
than another. So, I believe 32 are coming out on lot 28 and we're proposing to plant I forget 28 back or something, but then we've got more on lot 27. So, it's it is Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And I think the other part of it
too is it's all one family which also makes it well that that's what leads you to doing it this way in a more holistic but but you know what we're talking about here are two completely yes two waterfront lots with large nice houses being put on them so they're
not going to be co-owned by the same family forever and there will come a time when they are both owned by so these separate orders have to stand on their own. Understood completely. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. Anything else for Go ahead, Elise.
I have an annoying point that I keep bringing up on these types of large numbers of trees going out and 25% of the tree replacement is service berry. Is service berry really a tree? I look
at Eric and Bob for feedback on that, too. It's shown as both when I read about it. And I try to I try to be fair and up to date, but they will never grow to be what is there now. They're going to be shorter and shrubier, right?
They get to be about 15 feet tall. I guess it is kind of like what the goal of the site is if we wanted to replace full canopy trees. Enamel is not a canopy tree. It's a midstory tree. We love this tree. It has so much um value,
wildlife value, sports like over 200 species of caterpillar, has wonderful fruit for the animals and humans. Um so we we find this tree to be really valuable. Um I think that the goal was not to
replace a canopy. It was to replace a biodiverse multi-layered vegetative plant community which because of the poppplers is not there doesn't exist at the moment. Yes. There's no understory. There's no ground cut. There's no nothing. Right.
That's why they have to go. Right. Uh anybody else? Karen. Yes. Paul. I'm sorry. I think Commissioner Hbert brought this up, but one of the more important aspects is the fragmite removal. which we don't get a lot of um
a lot of detail on or well we don't get a lot of pro we don't have a lot of applicants come in and actually do it occasionally we get it um so how long does it take in terms of structuring an order or uh ongoing conditions
is it is it completed in three years I would assume you'd have to continue in an ongoing fashion beyond three years yeah it's similar to Japanese knotweed so we'll get really good control over it in the first three years, but we'll find some coming back. So, we'll want to continue to follow up with it and do
some ongoing management um after the initial three years, probably for another couple of years. And does it end at some point or did do you just perpetuity? So, most of our sites forever. I know. Exactly. Um I mean, the nice thing and the reason that we're
proposing to take this on as a fragmitees management project is because it's limited. Um it's not in the salt marsh area. It's limited in the areas where we've got some freshwater seeps. So I do think we can get really good control of it. If this were a site where the fragmitees were completely, you
know, surrounding the entire area, then we are reluctant to suggest to people that they undertake that because it's going to be like pushing that rock back up the hill in perpetuity. Um, but here I think we can get really good control of the fragmitees in this area because it's limited. Um, and that we're not we
don't have fragmmites in the surrounding properties that aren't managing it. Thank you, Teresa. Thank you. Can I just follow up on that? So, so um we will have our normal um provision condition that the mitigation area that is uh
adjacent to invasive vegetation and that includes invasive vegetation that's been ostensibly removed does have to be monitored for any possible return of that. Yes. In perpetuity basically so that at least the mitigation that we're putting in is protected forever. Yes.
that if any any signs of of fragmitees coming back be zapped. And I think we discussed on this at the site visit that the property to the south there is some popppler on the property to the south. Um one of the good things about managing the popppler on this property is we're going to
prevent it from continuing to sucker into the property to the north at 22 Captain Sears where we've already undertaken that management really successfully. So we will have to monitor that pro that property line on the south on the south. And you're putting put in a mo strip to we'll have to put in a mo strip to have
access so we can get in there and make sure the popppler is not moving. That will also be a continuing condition. Okay. All right. Anybody else? I do have a letter that came from an abutter.
Um it says I am commenting on behalf of the Wells family. We are a butters to the southeast of this pro project. We're concerned with the removal of so many old trees. Although not native, they nonetheless are large. Some probably 100
years plus mature trees that form a canopy which provides a large amount of shade to subject and neighboring properties. They are also they also provide habitat for all kinds of wildlife. Perhaps the removal of
poppplers could be limited to not include the popppler trees in the southeast quadrant of the plan where our land abuts the subject properties. If the removal goes ahead, we hope that new planting will be composed of large trees
that will replace the lost canopy in the not tooistant future. Thank you for reviewing our comments and it comes from Douglas Wells at 70 Stson Cove Road. Um,
so I think the species that we're proposing include um red maple and tupelo to replace. They're both fairly fast growing trees, particularly the red maple. Um, so I think as far as canopy loss, there will be some canopy loss for a temporary um for a short period of
time. Um, there is also still a number of healthy oak trees and pitch pines within that area. Those will obviously be remaining. um if we don't remove the trees, they're going to continue to sucker back in. So, we're in that as we just discussed.
Exactly. So, um so we would certainly consider and we are being very careful to make sure that we're also providing a significant amount of screening on that southeast property side. Um so that we are um being thoughtful for the neighbors. Yeah. Directly abuing.
Okay. Thank you. So I have a related question. Because these um poppplers are so tall and straight growing. Yeah. Is there a use to be made of the wood? Um what's going to become of what is cut down? They usually they go to get cut and go
to a composting facility. Um but I am not a wood specialist. Maybe. No. No. You don't want to use pop those. No pop for anything. No. They're not even not even really good for firewood. Um, they're not a good good wood for, you
know, uh, they're so tall and straight. Yeah, it's but it's not a um I don't know what it's not a hard wood. There's also it's not even as good as a pine. It's just they no one uses them. There must be a reason for it. I think they're very spongy. They hold a lot of water.
And a lot of carbon dioxide that's going to get released. Well, I mean, the idea of having a a low a low establishment um will will be a benefit because you'll attract a lot of pollinators. Um
yeah. No, I think that the ultimate plan is but maybe on the very far end for the neighbor. I don't know. You putting some trees there to make them happy or We are. We've got a significant amount of trees going in along that southern property line and continuing further to the east. Um there we've got the red
maples and the tupelos going in as we head further east on the property and then the eastern red cedars as we move more toward the towards the west. Um that will continue along that line where the arborites are located. So to continue screening along that edge.
Okay. Okay. Anybody else? Go ahead, Bob. I got a a question on the landscape plan uh by Andrew uh in our jurisdiction. What is the lawn going to be made up of? David,
I I think that was asked last time. I think Andrew had a note on there that would be the the fescue I have written down, but I don't know why. I don't see a note on the plan. That's the only thing. Yeah. Um and it should be non-errigated as
well. the uh the turf. Well, you'll have to temporarily ir temporarily irrigate it to get it going. Yeah. Right. But no permanent. So, could could he add a a note?
Uh no permanent irrigation in our jurisdiction and it's going to be a fescue mix. Yep. Thank you. All right. I think we have to continue this to a future meeting.
Um, how's August 27th sound? Sounds fine to me. Um, yes, we could do sooner. Um, I don't know if you have something before that. We are getting incredibly full.
Yeah. Um, so I think it's going to be difficult to do it sooner. Okay. Um, we already have quite a bit on for August 13th that's been continued or new um, applications and we're not even
close to the deadline. Um, and so I think August 27th is sort of the soonest. Okay. Okay. So, and I'm sorry, but it's just we're
getting slammed. Um Paul, if you could do a motion to continue it to August 27th. I move that we continue 28 and 28A Stson Cove Road to August 27th, 2025. Second. Okay. Bob I
Eric I Paul I Janet I and I say I um okay Paul I I think he's going to open it but I think we've already pretty much discussed All right.
Okay. I'll just read the the the legal then. Uh lots 27 and 27A Stson Cove Road, Bradley G. and Goffrey D. Watts. Trustees, map 11B, parcel W2, DP number SC 103732. Demolition of an existing
dwelling. Construction of a new dwelling within the buffer zone to a coastal bank. Invasive species control within the bank and land subject to coastal storm flow. It was continued from June 11, 2025. No EBA is required. Okay.
Do you have anything additional for 27 and 27A? I have nothing additional for 27 and 27A. Okay. Um, anybody have any additional questions, comments for this property versus 28? I think in the future maybe
we should just open both at the same time because they keep getting discussed together. So yeah, I mean sort of like what we did when we were doing the all the Tippy Run
um properties. So we will then continue it to August 27th as well. I got a I got a Oh, Bob. One more comment, Karen. Uh same thing on the on the lawn, David. Okay. On this on this one.
Okay. Thank you. I think everything that was said about 28 and 28A should be assumed. It's the same for this. Um, yeah, but okay. Is there anybody else who wants to
comment? No. Okay. If you continue it to the 27th as well. I move that we continue 27 and 27A Stson Cove Road to August 27th, 2025. Second. Okay. Elise. Hi. Janet. I. Paul.
Hi. Eric. Hi. Bob. I. And I say I. Thank you. Thank you. Bye. And Paul. The next one. Thank you, Madam Chair. Next on the agenda is a notice of intent. 70 Sears Point Road is the address. Susan and
Greg Shorton. Map 11A 1 parcel 7-5. D number SCE 103735. project is demolish and renovate a portion of an existing dwelling, addition, two decks, a viewing deck, a rinse station, and mitigation. It does
need CBA approval. And they're continuing it, correct? To August 27th. Okay. Then if we could Yeah, that this is the part that's being
continued to the RDA went today and they're continuing it to deal with defense and I think they need to um apply to ZBA as well. Yeah, I apologize. I didn't have that
note on my I know it just came in. That's why I know. So that's fine. So if we could have a motion to continue this one. I move that we continue 70 Sears Point Lane to August 27th, 2025. Second.
Okay. Bob I Eric I Paul I Janet I Elise I and I say I. Okay. The next Thank you Madam Chair. Next on the agenda is another notice of intent. The address is 70 Plum Daffy Lane. Plum
Daffy 208. Nominee Trust is the owner. Map 9A, parcel D14, D number SCE 103736, construction of a patio within a buffer zone to a coastal bank. No ZBA is required. Good afternoon, David Clark, Clark
Engineering on behalf of uh the trust and we also have Phil Cheney here prepared the mitigation plan for the project. Um, you saw this as an RDA uh a few months ago. Um, we're back
before you with uh a project to expand the uh the uh patios or add patios to the project. Um and as I explained a couple of months ago, uh when the house was built in
2008, uh the flood plane was different and uh made a finding at that time that the uh top of the bank was the top of the reetment. Um, now that the flood plane's changed, it's moved up the slope
into the uh into the uh unrevented portion of the bank and uh and that shifted the top of the bank to the first observable break which is considerably closer to the house. Um it's almost a 50-foot shift in in the in the 50 and
100 between 2008 and now. So now it's a considerable portion of the house is well all of the house almost is uh within the the 100 foot buffer to the top of the bank. Um in the plan that was approved in 2008
there was an extensive patio that was permitted around the pool uh almost 1,400 square feet of patio um that was never built. Um so after being in the home for for uh quite a while now uh
they've decided that they they would like some patio. Um they they know they they can't ask for what was permitted before. Um but uh so it's considerably less. It's it's uh I think the net
increase in the uh 50 to 100 is about 300 square feet. a little more. Um, and because of the shift to the the resource area, um, uh, the existing house and and all the improvements on the property are are
over the 35% maximum that the regulations now require. Um, so uh, we we are asking for a variance for this small increase. Um the second aspect of the project, there is a just a basically
a blue stone step that they would like to add to the uh to the porch that faces the water. Um 8 inches I believe is the width um for the entire length of that. What they're finding is the landscapers
in their uh uh string trimmers um uh trim that grass and do a number on the the the wooden structure. So they're finding that they're almost repainting, sanding and repainting that almost every year because the so they just want
something to step down to keep the landscapers away from it. Um and it's a very very modest uh increase in the no disturb zone. Um Phil's here to talk about the mitigation uh and be happy to answer any questions
on the site plan. Okay, Phil. Good afternoon, Phil Cheney, landscape designer. Uh you're looking at the mitigation plan that I submitted on the screen now, uh which includes both the the schedule uh of the plants proposed
along with the calculations below that uh they're uh required by your regulations is a total of 327 square ft plus or minus and we're proposing plus or minus 395 square ft. This would be
all uh located in the uh northern corner of the property. You see it up at the top there. Um there's currently a walkway that takes down to the water uh around uh through an an adjacent lane that
exists there. Now uh that pathway is quite broad and can really be um should be brought down closer to regulation. Uh so we're using shrubbery along both sides to condense that. the lower portion, the portion that's within the
50 to 100 that we're mitigating uh has been used uh occasionally as a parking space by uh vehicles that use that lane and they'd like to try to eliminate that. So that's why we're planting in that area as well, including uh some white pines uh to add some beef and uh
withstand car traffic in that space. So I think uh most of the the good part of the mitigation is in the 0 to50 and we're also doing great work by eliminating the the parking in that area. Okay. Thank you. Um anybody want to
start? All right. Well, first of all, I know you said you need a variance and I didn't see an alternatives analysis. Do we have one and I missed it? Um, should have been there. Um,
I I quickly looked again just to make sure because sometimes I missed them. Oh, yes, there is. Okay. Do nothing or project as proposed. So, no other alternatives other than do
nothing. Well, I mean, a practical alternative is is they they could use that area as a patio without putting the patio in and then you have lawn chairs out there and it's going to get beat up and um and
then you're going to have a degraded lawn. Um so, at the end of the day, you're going to be close to the the same situation. Um right, and they did really make an effort to to keep it as small as they they needed. uh knowing that there was that
significant shift in the resource area. So all that stone to the left of the what I assume is the dark black is the patio that all that's the fire pit.
That's those are uh basically uh flat stone all around the so that that is not set in concrete. So it's all uh semi-pervious. Okay.
So the total of the the darkened uh patio area and the the stones around the fire pit is that 300 square ft increase. Okay. Um anybody else?
Bob So David, now you're re you're right now you're at 42.4%. 50 to 100 and then you want to go up to uh 45 45.1%. Yeah with the increase
death by by a thousand cuts. I had I had a question for Phil too. Uh the mitigation the three white pines. Yes, sir. Uh they're pretty uh spaced pretty tightly, aren't they?
No, they're about 10 foot on center, I'd say. And they're 8 to 10 foot on center. Oh, 8 to 10. That's about the norm. I I I I'm never big on mitigating off in the distance somewhere out, but I guess
they want a view from the pool. They don't want anything. I mean, obviously not the white pines, but the plants. I'm always a big believer in adding to the bank, but such a small project. Exactly.
Well, because I like the idea of narrowing that use it less and to uh do something to prevent uh the parking in that area actually probably has a a bigger ecological bang. Yeah, that was my
I got I got convinced on that. Anybody have anything else? I struggle with the 45, but I know that they've, you know, 45% coverage, but I mean, I know they've worked hard to keep
it as small as possible, but it's hard to I think one of the mitigating factors on that is is as David said, the shift in the locations of the top of the bank. And so we're at that we're at this 40some because the entire house is in
the NDC. Yeah. So I know and so that was my that was never permitted that just happened by you know no no by by law by yeah yeah the change in the law so I think we can say that in the in the
order that helps to justify the because we're way over at this point we are and we struggle with that but I get it and I get why and and I appreciate that they've kept it as small as possible so Yeah. And the patio is is
wedged right up into, you know, it's not it's very small. It's very small. My when my guys used to do that with string trimmers, I made them go out with hand shears for a week for a punishment. Good. And yeah, that's Oh, yeah.
Boy, I'm glad it didn't work for you. Then I think we can go to an order. So, uh, I got a a go ahead question. David, the what is it like? Was it going to be like blue stone or something like that patio?
Yes. Is is it going to have grass in between the the stones or is it going to be set into grass or I can that the the fire pit patio would have grass in between the stones? Uh the rectangular patio would would not be be tighter set.
Yeah. So so it would just be set set into grass. The blue definitely. Yes. No, it's Yeah. It's really the look they wanted to achieve there is that Yeah. Natural. Yeah. Of the grass in between. So there'll be ample, you know, that that helps. Yeah. Be more infiltration. Definitely.
Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Thanks. Now I'm struggling with when to schedule this order. Uh, how about I mean it's not going to take a huge amount of our time at any meeting.
How about August 13th? It's fine with us. Okay. So, we will continue to August 13th for an order of conditions. I move that we continue 75 Plum Daffy Lane to August 13th for an order of
conditions. Second. Okay. Bob I Eric I Paul I Janet I Elise I and I say I Okay. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you. The next one Paul
uh next on before we start should we open these two together? I was going to suggest that Yeah. because even though they're separate. Yep. Okay. So, we'll read these read these together. Uh please, next on the agenda is notice of intent
for 53 Little Beach Road, Monomari Rips LLC is the owner. Map 16A, parcel H50, D number SCE10. I don't I just went on the portal. I didn't see the the number up. Okay. Uh demolish existing dwelling and construct new dwelling within land
subject to coastal storm flowage. uh in conjunction with this project. 47 Little Beach Road, Monoy Rips LLC is the owner. Map 16A, parcel H52, D number SCE 103737, demolish existing dwelling and construct
new dwelling within title 5 subsurface sewage disposal uh within land subject to coastal storm flowage. Uh ZBA is for going heard on 814 2025. Yes, that's what I've seen. Oh boy, we
got the big guns here today. Be important. You have to use the All right. David Clark, uh, Clark Engineering on behalf of, um, the applicants, uh, Bill Riley,
Mike Tannis, and Teresa, uh, and Blue Flex. Um, want to make one correction. Uh, and Paul had sent me a note. um wanted me to take a look at a few things and while I was looking at a few things uh
something struck me as being off on the on the calculations on site coverage. So, um I have a revised chart. U if you want a hard copy, I could pass it out now. Primarily, uh the existing dwelling
on number 53 Little Beach, we show it as 659 square ft. It's actually 1379. So that reduces the net increase on 53
from 2633 down to 1913. What struck me was I was looking at the numbers and say there's no way we're tripling the size of this house and uh and so I went back and looked at the numbers and and it was considerably different. Um
Sure. Um what's what's on the site plan is 659 as the existing dwelling on 53. It's actually 1379. I might as well pass this.
I see repeat 47. Yes, the smaller house was carried over. I see that now. I wonder about that. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. So, the increase is only 1913. Okay. Yeah.
So, um I I think the I don't know how many of you were on the commission when this was before you a few years ago. I remember that project never went forward obviously uh and uh we have new owners um that have a different v vision for
the property. So uh but it it's the fundamental uh portion of it is is about the same. They're going to demolish both cottages and build new cottages. Um the resource areas that are involved are there's a
coastal dune on the on the east side of both properties. Uh and behind number 53 uh what used to be a lawn is now reverted to a marsh. Um and uh it's basically a an inland
wetland at this point. Um the entire property is also within the flood plane. Um so there there are no portions of this site that's outside of a resource area.
Um when the septic system was the existing septic system was put in back in I think the early 90s uh a retaining wall was put in uh to minimize amount of fill. Um, and we show that on the plan.
And that's basically where the uh naturalized portions of the property begin. So everything towards the house from that retaining wall is uh pretty scruffy looking Cape Cod lawn and
uh up to and around the dwellings and uh all the way out to uh Little Beach Road. Um so again, the can demolish both buildings. Uh both buildings will be
placed on a FEMA compliant foundation. Uh because of the flood plane change, they're going to be significantly higher than what's there now. Um so that leaves the logistical problem of how do you get from the house down to the ground level.
So, uh, not only is the dwelling on 53 getting larger, but because it's so much higher, we had to work in some stairs to get get access to the building. Um, there's also a larger deck proposed
on the water side. That deck is all within the area that's going to be disturbed with the new Title 5 system. Um because we're demolishing both buildings, we we're bringing the the system up to code to minimize the amount of fill in the flood plane. The uh
septic system will include an IIA system for reduction of nutrients. Uh under the state permit for the technology, we have a choice of uh either reducing the footprint of the leech field or reducing
the depth of groundwater. Uh because of the sens sensitive nature of the this particular property, we have the isolated wetland across the street and the proximity of shellfish beds to the east and southeast. uh we chose to
maintain the uh separation in groundwater and reduce the size of the the footprint of the leeching facility. So that's the smallest uh size system we can put on the property while maintaining the the required separation
of groundwater. Um so as far as alteration to resource areas uh we we are within the 15 and 100 from the from the isolated wetland and uh we are within 15 and 100 from the
coastal dune. We do not show the 50 and 100 from the dune. We can certainly add that to the plan. Uh it doesn't change any of the coverage numbers because the coverage numbers that was included in the NOI
um are based upon the entire lot being a no disturb zone because it is in the flood plane. So uh whatever increases are being proposed we're we're at the 2 to1 mitigation uh at a minimum.
Um, all of the alterations are are primarily within portions of the site that have been altered in the past. These cottages have been there here since the 20s, I believe. Um, one of the earlier ones
that uh, the Horn family built. Um, so it it's been used for as a resident residential property for nearly a century. Uh there really isn't any wildlife habitat, so to speak, in the areas we're we're altering. Um that
being said, uh as you can see from Teresa's plan, um we're adding back quite a bit. Um so, um there's any questions on the site plan and uh as far as the septic system,
placement of the houses, the elevation of the houses, be happy to answer them. Um, otherwise Mike is here to talk about the restoration. Okay, guess Mike, why don't you go and
then we can open it to questions and comments from everybody. Okay, Mike Tannis, Blue Flex Design. Um, David pretty much laid out the existing conditions. As he said, most of the upland is almost entirely
uh mowed and maintained as Cape Cod lawn with the exception of a little area near the southern property border where you see some native pines and cedars and oaks and bayerries. The coastal dune is in good condition.
It's standard typical vegetation. It's a patchwork of open sand and beach grass with bay berry in the lowlying areas. And then closer to the upland, closer to that wall, the stands of bayberry get
denser and they it's kind of transitioning to a young coastal forest. You start to see some pitch pine, red cedar, and black cherries. So, we are proposing to restore 10,243
square feet from what's currently Cape Cod lawn back to native habitat. Um the we're proposing to remove the concrete retaining wall um to the souththeast of building 53
and then that will be graded to a sta stable angle of repose after the construction and we will seed that with a mix of native grasses and wild flowers and cover it with biodegradable erosion control blankets. And then in early spring, that area will be plugged with
bare root American beach grass to further stabilize the slope. I don't think they're taking that out. The few invasive species on site will be cut flush with the ground and removed. Systemic herbicide will be applied directly to the cut stump and the roots will be left in the ground to decompose.
Um bare and disturbed areas after construction will also be seated with that mix of grass and wild flowers. Have that question. Woody vegetation will be planted after that. We're calling for 277 native trees and shrubs
including service berry, eastern red cedar, bay berry, beach plum, bakaris, barberry, inkberry holly, and arrowwood viburnum. Basically mimicking the community that's exists offsite. Um, additionally 129 little blue stem
grasses will also be planted. Temporary irrigation will be required to get the plants established for two or three growing seasons and it will be removed once they are established. Yes. A lot of gr Okay. Thank you. So
this reminds me of Stson Cove. I've got two properties, two separate NOIs and the plans everything is for the whole two properties. So I first
of all I can't tell and maybe you can tell me where is the property line for the properties between them. That is the common line where ex where the
40 I think it's 47 you're building right on top of the property line. Well, it's currently over right right now the the structure on 47 is a couple feet over the property line. Okay. Um so we're moving it back. Um so that's why primarily uh a portion of the
increase in building coverage for a lot uh for number 47 is going up because there's 40 square feet or so on number 53. Okay. It's going. So so there is a net increase in building
coverage on 47 and it's primarily a covered entry um existing and Okay. Um, I'd like to see the the mitigation and
the numbers for mitigation broken out between the properties because when we do the orders, we have to put these numbers in and right now we just have a grand total.
So, I struggled with that. Um, why are you moving all the the two homes closer to the 50
rather than I mean they were a little further back before? Just curious. Um, basically the direction of flooding. Um we know that that the inlet is moving south. Uh there is a
barrier beach there right now, right? Which popped up somewhat quickly and could go away somewhat quickly. U so uh the uh the high water mark back in 1988
89 was quite close to this house. Um and so they've had 40 years almost 40 years of accretion there. Um that might not always be the case. Uh the second reason is uh there is a
roadway between the project and the isolated wetland across the street. It's not much of one. Um the folks uh down at Starfish Condominiums uh really don't use it anymore, but it is still a
walking path and uh people use it to um go to v various beaches in the area. Um so uh we moved it back for that reason. And uh and also
uh in looking at when that septic system went in in the 1990s, they they had to have disturbed quite a bit of the area on the water side of that retaining wall to build that retaining wall. And that vegetation has come in awful thick right up to that wall. So
the biggest bang for the buck would was to remove that wall and uh and blend the mitigation into that naturalized area. So to basically to continue that that and enhance that naturalized area between the property and the harbor.
Okay. Thank you. Um can I just follow up on that quickly? Yeah. So right now though the the the drop in grade on either side of the retaining wall is pretty what three or four feet. So when you remove it, are
you going to um I'm not seeing the grades being smoothed out, but I imagine how do you deal with that with what's going to happen? So when we we filed this with zoning board, uh the commissioner and the zoning agent looked at it and and asked
me to sharpen my pencil on the fill on that side of the the property. Uh so I did. Uh so the original plan that was filed showed the uh the toe of that slope being east of the bottom of the wall. So there was a little bit of fill into that naturalized area. So by
redoing all that uh and and changing it slightly and tightening up the grades, the toe of the slope is now going to be on the west side of that wall. So that that's the reason another reason why we don't need the wall anymore. Um, and you can
uh switch to the engineered site plan if you're Where's the proposed six plan revised? Yep. Yep. Nope. Down. Yep. That one. So down in this area, um, we sh now show
the 8 foot contour on the west side of the wall. The top of the wall is about elevation nine. Um, so we'll be able to stop the the filling uh in regrading right at this point and uh and not get into any of
that naturalized vegetation. So we'll be able to work from the west side of that wall to remove it. Uh and then the the clean material will be brought in to construct the septic system the minimum amount that's required and then uh
that area can be restored without getting into that area at all into the naturalized area. Rough where roughly would elevation six lie just on the other side. Elevation six is down here. Um uh it it and that'll remain.
Yeah. Yep. So, uh, we can actually tighten up the work limit now to be right at at the wall since they can do all the work from from the other side. Um, there's elevation six right there. And, um, it basically dies into the wall
somewhere in here. And this is all higher than elevation six. So you give us coverage percentages within NDZ and flood plane. What is the percent in the outer aura?
It looks like it's like the Yeah. So we it since the entire site is in the flood plane that's why we did it that way. I can give you a calculation um and the number should add up to the total that that's that you have already
um of what's actually 50 to 100. I'm mostly concerned about the percentage because it's 35% is our rag. Oh yeah. Um, I wouldn't be surprised if we were into
the 60 to 70% existing. Exactly. Exist. And um, hence why I'm asking um, and again, although this time I've checked a couple times, I still could have missed it. Do
you have an alternatives analysis? Pretty sure I I sure didn't see it. Did anybody else see it? Maybe it's just me today. Um, it says variances required, but it
doesn't say I I can't find Excuse me. If somebody else wants All right. In the meantime, anybody else? Yeah. Well, I just like to bring up the elephant in the room, probably why
Bill's here. Um, is the uh I mean, it's your god-given right to replace structure. What what's there? Uh, it's in the flood plane. And, uh, I'm just concerned with this increase on the structure or the footprint it's taking up. I mean whether it's closer to
the road or closer that doesn't bother me as much and your explanation was was good. Um but you have considerable amount amount of uh increase in square footage. Um did did you count up the square footage of the wall you taken out
to give you credit for some square footage? Answer. That's a David question. He's coming. No rush. But, you know, it is an elevated land form and the uh so I think the fact that
there's an expansion See, I told you that's why Bill's here. No, I mean, yeah. It's not something that in general would uh displace any flood waters. The retaining walls for for the septic
system uh was included in the site coverage for 53. Um, so we do show a reduction in in walls. Um, but I can I can get you that exact
number. I So that'll help you with some square footage, but I mean it's already in there. So Oh, so you've included the square footage to bat to go against the increase of the structure. Uh while there's not so much the increase in the
structure, but other site improvements like the decks and other retaining walls and walkways and things. Okay. Um I mean is there I mean is there any way that you can maybe I mean you got a deck on the south side and uh
you know maybe re you could reduce a little bit on somewhere like the deck goes the whole length of the house. I mean, could you make it a, you know, to knock off some of the square footage to uh, you know, to compromise here? I mean, it's quite a quite an increase in
square footage. We can consult with the uh with the owner. I think we could probably take some square footage out of the deck. Okay. I I know I did a an alternatives analysis because I remember struggling
with it. Um, and uh it's not in the file and obviously it's not attached to my narrative. So I have to go find that. Okay. Just because we'll obviously be continuing it so whenever we're meeting again.
Anybody else? Bob? Uh yeah. Uh I had a question about the U other retaining wall that's going to remain. Why is that going to remain? Oh, the one around 47. Yes. Um
I mean it looks it looks pretty ugly right now and uh it's not works. It's not going to serve any purpose. Correct. Uh it's it's it's right now the septic systems within it is in it. Yeah. But that's going to be removed. Correct.
It it will be. Yes. Yeah. But there's no there's no other outside space around the house. And the other reason is uh in in past experience with projects like this in this neighborhood, the zoning board has
concerns about exposed foundation. Um and because this house is significantly higher than what's there now, um it we left it for the specific purpose of having two tiers of of vegetation um to
to screen that foundation. So um otherwise, if it's removed, there's four more feet of foundation that'll be exposed. Um, we can cover some of that with vegetation, but it'll be a long
time before it's it's completely screened. Well, one of the one of the problems we have is that after the zoning board approved 46, which is the building across the way, uh, that that announces itself with a
huge retaining wall when you drive in there, like the one across, has uh, been uh, something that the zoning board considers a black eye. They approved it. They weren't happy.
Uh but uh now when we appear when we last appeared before them with this property, it was really a major issue and so we're trying to avoid that. It also gives the
47 a little bit outdoor space, too. Well, not usable. Not much usable outside space if you look at the mitigation. I mean, the thing I like about it is that the mitigation basically surrounds the house, right? But it doesn't look like it's,
you know, a mountaintop, right? The way 46 does. It does. It does. It sure does. Bob, did you have any uh the uh Yeah. Uh the uh so it's going to be a shared septic system.
Yes. And um I had a question about the mitigation. Uh the uh micro clover lawn, fescue micro clover lawn. Uh it's a lot of sun there. Is the micro clover going
to grow well a lot of sun? Yeah, in our experience it does well even without irrigation. Yeah, I mean it's it's going to be maintained as a Cape Cod lawn. So if it whatever will be there will be there. Whatever whatever lives will remain.
Yeah. In my in my experience, the micro clover doesn't like the the heat and the sun. So this may be a case where we go more for white clover than micro clover. The white clover does really well and it stays green throughout the year even when the grasses are dormant. Um so that's something that we should consider
on this particular site and switching the micro clover out for white clover. Yeah. Yep. Um that's a perfect site for beach grass. I know what you think of all the fog they have down there. It's going to stay nice and cool.
And the uh the J uh last time we visited this site there was Japanese black pine um within the dune areas. Uh will that be uh addressed at all? No, it's invasive. We are not in this plan calling to
remove it. Good for the woodpeckers. Okay. Okay. Anybody else? I I have a question about for David about these about this the topography
and the grading. Um so currently as I'm trying to figure out the the existing grades the highest elevation where the houses are is at 10. Correct. Where does the Vzone
start? Where's the Vzone is um you can pan it is actually If you can pan down, Paul, it's down there. Well, that's 15, but then it, as you
were saying, the the topography drops, so it goes then down. I thought you asked where the the Vzone was. Yeah. So, but so that that's the transition from Vzone to Azone. And so, this section of the property is all Azone,
right? But even though even though the property drops after that, you know, that's the high po point where that Vzone line is and then it drops down. Yes, it does. And then you have this slight elevation where the houses are creating kind of a bowl which always strikes me as like a big invitation for
water to accumulate. Oh, absolutely. Yeah. I mean, um I mean you always see a dip behind the primary dune. Um it's always lower and then and then you have undulating dunes behind that. So when this was built was that was were
these was this area um filled to create the the higher area for where the house I I think in in the late 80s the high watermark was here. Um and and this is all accreted since then.
Um if you remember well if you were here uh after 1987 when the first when the break first occurred the uh erosion uh moved north of the break first of all and that's when we lost the
tener houses up by hallway street right so then amazingly the erosion moved south if you remember the the Nelson house which was immediately south of the tennis courts had to build uh had to bring in sand
because they were like 14 feet from the high water mark. Now they have a retaining wall. They have a wall to protect themselves from the dune that's built up. And so there's been so many changes in here that it's really difficult to describe exactly
what happened when but this is the end result and we don't think uh we think if anything the vzone is going to be further move further away because we think the this whole process is moving southeast.
two questions that for that then one is um so let's talk about that dune um you're showing it per the uh D map it basic it basically goes up and wraps around 47 to the north is that dune
migrating is it moving um because of 100 years of residential use um it's it's being kept back um I I do have a aerial photograph from 1959
when the causeway was built and a lot of that dredge material was placed around all these cottages. Um and and so who knows what was there before that but that was 1959. So this this area was barren because of all that fill in 1959.
Um I don't think it's moved much since then um because of the height of the dunes that are in front of this. Um, so, uh, I think it's very stable around the houses and, uh, if it wasn't for the human activity, I don't know where the
edge of the doom would actually be. Right. So, it's it's it it it's likely to stay where it is. Oh, absolutely. Okay. So you're showing though that from what is existing at 6810 elevations
leading on both sides sloping up to where the houses sit. Um up from what is currently now six you have 10 and 12 up from six and 8 and 10. Have you c what is the fill calculation for creating that to put these houses?
Uh I can get you that net increase. But basically, we're going from elevation 10 right around the existing house up to 12 and a half. Yep. Right. Or finished grade. Okay. Is there any indication that any of the
potential future flooding could come from the BBW across the street rather than from the um that that floods on a regular basis now because the lack of vegetation in the middle of it. It it's it's uh um I was
there in the end of March to to mark the site uh for doing the perk tests out there and the water was uh almost into the road in front of the house. Um, so it was
flooded and um and so um the official uh flood study uh flood insurance study for Chadam states that the direction of flood for this property is from stage harbor. Um but
standing there on the on the crest of the septic system the existing septic systems um that's not what pops into your head. It's definitely coming from the east. Um, and so, uh, there's always going to be a potential
of of flooding from from the west. Uh, it depends on the storm. We get a northeast storm, three-day one like we've all seen, um, flooding is going to come from the east. Um except that there is in that in that
2019 storm tide pathways report that uh Mark Belli did is showing potential flooding coming from Oh, absolutely. If we have a hurricane, right? Right. That fills up. It's it it's it's the flood's coming from the other direction. Absolutely. South of that.
Yep. The storm surge is coming from the south. Significant hurricane. Yep. So it all this is a a unique property in that they're they're susceptible to both storms. That's well established. Pretty good. I mean this this area flooded to I think
elevation 8 during the 93 storm. Um what what about 2018? I I it was less um from from uh I know uh Thad Eldridge has information when uh after the 93 storm
because his father was hired by the town to go out and mark the rack lines around town and uh in this area um elevation. Yeah, it was nine. That's what I saw. Nine.
Get out of your car quick. Get in. Isn't this Isn't this where they showed the that famous photograph of the Coast Guard with the saving people? Inflatable vehicle coming in and getting people out of these houses. Yeah, that's what I thought. I thought this was this neighborhood.
Nine. Okay. Again, it's not our like I think Eric said, it's not our job to comment on, you know, the wisdom or not of of projects in terms of we we try to protect the the environment
there, not the house. But but well, the goal is to make sure that nothing we do adds. Yes. So, back to the point that you were making about about there's no possibility of flood waters coming through that are diverted by
these now these very high foundations that are going to be put in. Why is that? Why is that not a problem under the performance standards for the flood plane? Well, because the the landform is doing the diverting, you know, if the landform washes away, you know, we still have a
right to maintain our our house. So the water was being diverted by the existing dune and the fill that is going to protect the houses. Is going to let you put that fill in? Well,
as as the storm comes through and and the base flood increases during the storm event, the water is going to travel through this area. Um, but whether this structure is here or not, it's still
going to flood to the same elevation, right? So, it's not going to increase flooding, right? Um, no, I'm talking about diversion of storm water. Well, the in the first place, you really there is no diversion in a in a tidal flooding. I
mean, the water, this is a discussion we've had many times, whether you have a huge pile of sand or a huge hole. The height of the storm surge is determined by factors far out at sea.
And nothing nothing we do, man does, is going to change that. And so as long as it's in a still water flood zone, which we are, the water's going to rise and the water's going to, you know, go away with the tide,
but we're not diverting it anywhere. So like a riverine situation, right? Yeah. So the the base flood elevation uh not the base flood elevation, the still water elevation uh for this section of Chattam is I think elevation 10.1.
Okay. So that's with no wave action. Right. Okay. and the flood heights above that we're in the we're in the A13 uh indicates that FEMA studies show that
we can get three foot waves here. Um we're doing a project right now where we have the Woodsole group looking at a flood plane um and seeing if they can reduce the the elevation of the flood. uh in talking with them,
one of the key components in the in the uh the modeling that that they're required to use by FEMA is vegetation. More vegetation you have, uh it knocks down the waves. It it it limits the uh
inland migration of storm debris. So, uh and that that's another reason why we chose to move the house to the to the west a little bit. And then you look at the blue flax plan. We're loading up the east side of this property and we're
taking the wall out. So that vertical obstacle is coming out. And so if during a storm surge, um if there's erosion on the slope, so be it. It actually helps to dissipate the movement of sand dissipates energy
whereas the that small retaining wall doesn't, right? So we we think there's a lot of pluses here. One last question. I think it's the last maybe. Um so because of the elevation 53 is going to get a garage.
Yeah, because it's got a that's one of the benefits to the applicants is because we have to go up three and a half feet I think from the existing Doppler foundation. There's enough room to get a drive on the garage now with with the appropriate flood vents or is it going to be more open? um
appropriate flood vents and um one of the concerns the planning board always brings up when they review driveways in the flood plane is the ability of the land to absorb flood waters. That's more of an inland issue.
But um to address that, the architect has in incorporated into the design of the basement flab a perimeter drain around around the whole foundation and the slab will be set on I think 12 or 18 inches of gravel. So uh the flood vents
will let the water into the garage. That perimeter drain will let the water go down under the slab. Yeah. Like a French drain. Yeah. Okay. All right. Thank you. Anybody else? We have a few things we're going to
need. Um, you're going to look into making the decks smaller. You're going to give us fill calculations, the coverages, percentage. Um you're going to mark the
um 1,500 for the resource area. Um anything? Yeah. One other thing um for blue flex um the the land management plan simply says that there's a small amount of
invasives that'll be managed. Can you provide a little more detail about Yeah. what it is and how much there is and Sure. There's um it's mostly just oriental bittersweet and vine honeysuckle mixed in with the existing
bay that are there. And where is that throughout or in a particular area or it's it's sporadic throughout, but mostly on the southern property side, but it but you see it throughout below the wall, the existing retaining wall. You'll see sprigs kind
of Okay. climbing up. Okay. And you're going to break out your numbers for mitigation and everything between the two properties so that we when we write the order we can
give the specifics for each property since they are separate um NOIs. Yes. Um anything I missed? Uh the only thing I would say I think that the deck on the south is really should go. I mean, there's no
sense of having that there. That'll that'll help you in a lot of square footage. I mean, you already got a deck. Oh, this this this little deck here. Well, when I saw the stakes, it actually kind of went out pretty good, you know.
Um, they they have an access door here. Oh, okay. Platform. Oh, just to sit out there and and because we're so much higher than what's there now, we need all those steps to get down to grade. Oh, I see. Okay. Oh, that's a door. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.
Okay. Um and you're of course going to on the plan correct the for 53 they coverage. Yes. Numbers. Uh get you an alternatives analysis too. Yeah. Yeah. And alternatives. Anything else?
I just I was just wondering if we could include a note on the mitigation and restoration planting plan again on the lawn. It's not going to receive any permanent irrigation. Yes. We will add that. Thank you. All right. So, we need to continue it
and August 14th. Yeah. ZBA August 14th. So, yeah. So, we're August 27th or September 10th. Well, we have uh have zoning on August 14th. 14th. Yeah. So, either of those is
okay for that. Um first meeting in September 10th. Sure. Okay. Then we will continue both properties to September 10th, but we will do them as separate motions,
please. I move that we continue 53 Little Beach Road to September 10th. Second. Okay. Bob. I. Eric. Hi. Paul. Hi. Janet. I Elise I and I say I.
Okay. And the next one I move that we continue 47 Little Beach Road to September 10th, 2025. Second. Okay. Elise I Janet I Paul I Eric I Bob I
and I say I Okay, so we'll see you September 10th for these. All right, Paul. Thank you very much. Thank you. Uh the next the next and last item on the agenda before you adjourn is a request for a certificate of compliance. The address
is 16 Cine Road Edward Actton map 11L parcel HC 3 D number SE 103773. The project was property redevelopment construction of a new dwelling and with detached garage pool patio driveway
including land subject exc in including a land management plan. This is a partial COC request. Uh I think thad's on line. Um the application's complete. I'll just chime in for a second. So I inspected it yesterday. I don't
know if you all went out there. Um mitigation is only a year old. We have a monitoring report from um Teresa. Um it will have to continue for at least three years. So we're holding back on that. But it looked to me like uh the dwelling
uh the pool, the patio, the dry wells um for the storm water all were done in compliance with the order. Um there was mitigation 3,024 square ft in the outer order and 11,537
in the NDZ. That's I guess they've gotten rid of the invasive stuff and they're now moving to the next uh step. So I think in the COC we should send a letter out making sure that the owner um whoever that might be understands they
have to continue with this mitigation because it's just getting started. Other than that that if you want to the chair. Yes that please. All right. Take that. Eldridge, you Southeast. You're representing Ed
Actton. And um I believe they have an agreement that Ed will be in charge of making sure that the land management plan continues through the three-year period. So, we're not going to get we're not going to get a separation between owners.
Okay, that is correct. Yes. Yeah. Teresa just confirmed. Good. Okay. Um and again this is just for the buildings not for the mitigation or any plantings because this order is actually only from
2024 2024 like end of April sold. Yeah. So any other questions comments from commissioners? Okay then we can go to a motion please.
I move that we approve the partial certificate of compliance for 16 C pine road. Second. Okay. Elise I Janet I. Paul I. Eric I. Bob I. And I say I. Thanks that. Thank you
Teresa. Thank you so much. All right we have one more motion. Minutes. Minutes. Why? We have no minutes. Nope. No minutes. No minutes. Typo.
I move that we adjourn the meeting. Second. Okay. Bob I. Eric. I. Paul. I. Janet. I. Elise. I. And I say I. We are out.